Connection ErrorBad RequestThis page went staleSession ExpiredSign in requiredForbiddenNot FoundToo Many RequestsServer ErrorBad GatewayService UnavailableGateway TimeoutHTTP Version Not Supported
Session Expired
Your session has expired. Please log in to continue.
Sign in required
You need an account to do that. Sign in or create one — it only takes a minute.
This page went stale
Your security token was rejected, usually because the page sat open too long or you signed in elsewhere. Nothing was saved. Reload the page and try again.
Request Failed
We encountered an issue while processing your request.
Please check your internet connection and try again.
Error Details:
Share Link
Posts from Preparing for the "Van Kanegem" tournament.Auto-translated
Actually, in this specific instance that you're referring to, dear Tokha, AlexPankom and I were discussing GRAILS, not the ranking system. And don't worry about not understanding how the ranking is calculated – you don't need to delve into it – no one will deceive you. You'll get the score that corresponds to how far you progress in the map.
Do you think I won't understand? How long have you been discussing this topic with rankings and grails? Have you decided on anything concrete?
Do you think I won't understand? How long have you been discussing this topic with ratings and grails? Have you decided on anything concrete?
I don't know about the grails; at least, VDV promised to award grails based on his own system in his tournaments. I saw a table – it currently has question marks, but he promised to replace the question marks with numbers later on for all his tournaments. He also calculates the rating based on his own system, which he needs precisely for calculating the grails. Also, take a look at the results of the BestOfBest tournament. There's already a table showing the rating calculation using a non-linear system, which has experimental status. VDV promised to continue publishing this table if I keep calculating the rating. But I agree – you can discuss it for a long time and not come to anything – you just need to do it – you can't please everyone. I don't know what and how they will calculate in Kanighem's tournament, but AlexPank promised to calculate the rating using a non-linear system and an oscillator in parallel. And you say that nothing concrete has been decided :) You already have a rating of 21.43 for the BestOfBest tournament using the experimental system
Yes, I know, but could you tell me what formula you used to get this result? I don't have time to figure out your dialogues...
It's a non-linear system. We took the leader's result (36 days) and multiplied it by 100. Then, 3600 / PlayerDays(i). So, Dmitry has 100 for the tournament. Calculate it yourself: 3600 / (your days). You can also check it that way :) The position in the non-linear system doesn't matter. It only considers your result in relation to the leader.
You'll thank me later :) Just wait until you miss the next VDV tournament. Because before the next tournament, all players' ratings will be reduced by 10%. So for you, it will be by 2.14 :)
It's good because it's as simple as can be. There are some minor flaws, but they can be fixed. Acceptable limits have been introduced for leaders, depending on the size of the map. That is, if a leader doesn't meet reasonable time limits, they won't get 100 points for the tournament. Accordingly, the others will then try to outperform the leader, so everyone needs to strive for a good result and try to complete the map in as few days as possible. The system automatically takes into account the player's ranking – the fewer days, the higher the ranking.
I see the topic is developing... :) I'm already starting to get lost in all the new features... IronAxe;64011
Acceptable limits have been introduced for leaders, depending on the size of the map.
Who determines the "reasonable acceptable limit," and how much trust do we place in this expert? That's the first thing.IronAxe;64011
In other words, if a leader doesn't meet the reasonable limits for completing the game, they won't get 100 points for the tournament. Consequently, the others will be jumping ahead of the leader.
And secondly, there's no point in calculating from the "acceptable limit." Because a proportionality coefficient is simply applied – and a reducing coefficient is applied to the tournament rating of all players. k = D(acceptable limit) / D(leader), where D is the number of days spent completing the game. In other words, why complicate the calculation mechanics if no one gets an advantage?IronAxe;64011
The system automatically takes into account the place occupied by the player – the fewer days, the higher the place.
It seems, on the contrary, that it doesn't take into account the place occupied by the player... Or what was meant? :)
You'll thank me later. You'll miss the next VDV tournament, won't you? Because before the next tournament, all players' ratings will be reduced by 10%. That means yours will be reduced by 2.14.
Yes, I understand everything about the VDV system; it's just that there are so many different other systems being discussed here that it's hard to figure out what's what. And the aging system is comforting because I'll be 8 points behind the leader.
I see the topic is developing... :) I'm already starting to get lost in the new features... Who determines the "reasonable acceptable limit" and what is the degree of trust in this specialist? That's the first thing.
I determine it. The degree of trust will be shown by practice - my rating is experimental. And without these acceptable limits, there remains a flaw if the leader is a player with 1000 days (I'm exaggerating, you understand the meaning).AmberSoler;64014
And secondly, there is no point in counting from the "acceptable limit". Because a proportionality coefficient is simply applied - and a reducing coefficient is applied to the tournament rating of all players. k=D(acceptable limit)/D(leader), where D is the number of days spent on completing the game. In other words, why complicate the calculation mechanism if no one gets an advantage?
It won't work. Look at that file with the lyrics - everything is clear there. Or will I misunderstand you again? What do you mean by D(acceptable limit)? For a map of the large type, the acceptable limit is from 1 to 36 days, so that the leader gets 100. Everyone else is based on that. If he gets between 36 and 43, he will get approximately 80, and everyone else is based on that. BUT it's not linear. I already said about the advantage. If the leader goes beyond all acceptable limits, completing it in 1000 days, he will get 50 - this is the minimum that the leader can get. I take this into account in the situation when Dmitry and Radik accidentally miss the next tournament, and if, at the same time, no one can show a result worthy of it (within the limits), then it is illogical to put a hundred into the rating. We will be to blame if we can't.AmberSoler;64014
It seems, on the contrary - it does not take into account the place occupied by the player... Or what was meant? :)
Why should I take into account the place - it is automatically included there. The fewer days, the higher the place :) But if there are too many days, then no place will help :) You will get the first place, taking into account the DAYS!
Added 6 minutes ago tokha;64041
yes, I understood everything in the VDV system, it's just that there are so many different other systems being discussed here that it's hard to figure out where what is... and the aging is comforting because I will be 8 points behind the leader.
That's right, the stronger the player and the higher his rating, the more he should maintain his status, showing that he is strong and can easily cover the costs of aging with his results and move forward. That's another thing. It was planned to age by 33%, but people don't want to. Otherwise, the leaders would have to work even harder, or those who want to be them :) Maybe VDV will agree to age by 33% at least once a year in a super tournament? :)
Added 9 minutes ago tokha;64041
yes, I understood everything in the VDV system, it's just that there are so many different other systems being discussed here that it's hard to figure out where what is... and the aging is comforting because I will be 8 points behind the leader.
Because in the Kanigema tournament, they wanted to calculate the rating in a special way. The fact that there will be no aging during the tournament is correct. But they also want to take into account the place occupied by the player. But then the meaning of the non-linear component disappears in some major situations. Yes, there may never be such situations - but what if they happen? Obvious flaws are visible in stupid examples, and if the examples are complex, the flaw will not disappear, it will just be less noticeable.
Tried to figure out the scoring systems. The result: 1) wasted a lot of time reading posts 2) tried to create my own version 3) hit a snag because I'm not familiar with all the nuances of evaluation, i.e., for example, besides the speed of completion, is anything else important? Because sometimes it seems like it is (parameters and mercury), and sometimes it isn't (only for those who "joined" on the same day).
Richard, 3) - it depends on the tournament. All stages of the "Van Kanigem" tournament are timed, so speed is the most important factor. Mercury and stats are just additional parameters if the number of days is the same.
Если тебе не везёт в жизни, - играй в какую-нибудь другую игру:rolleyes: Лидер клана "Из многих единое" Приключения – это сплошные неприятности, только про них почему-то потом интересно вспоминать...
Richard, 3) - it depends on the tournament. All stages of the "Van Kanigem" tournament are held for speed, so that is what matters most. And mercury and stats are like an additional parameter if the number of days is the same.
THX That's why I've put my ideas aside for now, because... in a word, I'm still a "newbie" :)
Tried to figure out the scoring systems. The result: 1) spent a lot of time reading posts
It's good that you at least approached solving the problem this way – that’s commendable.Richard_I;71727
2) tried to create my own version
So, you created your own version – calculate and maintain the ranking yourself. Therefore, everything is in your hands.Richard_I;71727
3) ran into a problem because I am not familiar with all the nuances of evaluation, i.e., for example, besides the speed of completion, is anything else important? Because sometimes it seems like yes (parameters and Mercury), and sometimes no (only for those who “joined” on the same day).
For now, this resource works as follows: For each Tournament, they award Grails (a kind of virtual currency on this resource, but so far there doesn't seem to be anywhere to spend them - ideas are under development), and these Grails are awarded for placement in the Tournament, for oil, for pumping up stats, for descriptions, or even for some creative work on the portal. But in addition to this, we have tried to come up with a simple game rating based on playing Heroes. There are three types of systems here. One of them is purely mine, and the other two types are modified versions of it. I don’t quite agree with the modifications, so I announced that I will keep my own rating from Axe, regardless of what the others do. See the link:/topic/2039/ There is a file with documentation according to which I calculate. In my system, only the speed of completing the main task of the Tournament is taken into account. Even the place is not taken into account. P.S. Richard, I even tricked you a little. The universal rating was aimed at 33%. My rating is loyal to newcomers and severely affects the accumulated rating of veterans. Newcomers – everywhere we open doors; veterans – everywhere we show respect
GriB_o.k.
